Other High Profile Cases and Persons of Interest > The murder of JonBenét Ramsey (6) on 25/26 December 1996.
Friend of beauty queen JonBenet’s family backs theory brother killed her.
John:
Friend of beauty queen JonBenet’s family backs theory brother killed her and parents covered it up.
By CAROLINE IGGULDEN in New York
25 September 2016
Judith Phillips, a Ramsey family friend for more than ten years, told how she had often seen flashes of brother's temper.
IT is almost 20 years since the body of six-year-old beauty pageant queen JonBenét Ramsey was found bludgeoned and strangled in the wine cellar of her parents’ suburban home.
Yet the world’s fascination with the bizarre circumstances surrounding the Christmas murder shows no sign of fading.
Last week a US documentary claimed JonBenét’s brother Burke, who at the time was just nine years old, could be to blame for the death which his parents hastily covered up.
No charges have ever been filed and authorities have stated in the past that Burke, now 29, is NOT a suspect.
He strongly denies he or his parents were involved in the crime and has offered to take a lie-detector test.
But a fresh storm erupted this month as viewers say he was grinning while discussing his sister’s death with US TV psychologist Dr Phil.
The case unfolded on Boxing Day morning, 1996, when mum Patsy called 911 claiming her daughter was missing and she had found a ransom note in her home in Boulder, Colorado.
Just hours later, after detectives had arrived, John Ramsey discovered JonBenét’s body in the basement.
In addition to a fractured skull, the girl’s wrists were tied over her head and duct tape covered her mouth. She had been strangled with a garrotte fashioned from a broken paintbrush — the remnants of which were found in Patsy’s art box.
Footage soon emerged showing JonBenét in child beauty pageants, plastered in make-up with a bouffant. The images made the case unforgettable.
Now, in CBS documentary The Case of JonBenét Ramsey, a former investigator for Boulder’s District Attorney gave his theory that the little girl and her brother clashed over a snack of fresh pineapple.
JonBenét’s autopsy report showed undigested pineapple in her system. It was a clue which had baffled investigators, given her parents claimed their daughter was asleep when they returned from a Christmas party and had been put straight to bed.
Crime scene footage showed a bowl of pineapple and a glass of iced tea both bearing Burke’s fingerprints.
Patsy always denied knowledge of the pineapple or how it ended up on the table, despite her fingerprints also being found on the bow.
On the programme former investigator James Kolar states: “I think the Ramseys came home at around 9.30, 10 o’clock. I think JonBenét was asleep.
“I think John did carry her upstairs. Patsy remained downstairs with Burke and served him the tea and pineapple.
“Then she got JonBenét up to make sure she used the toilet.”
James claims JonBenét later went downstairs and grabbed a chunk of Burke’s pineapple causing her furious brother to hit her with a flashlight.
The TV documentary also pointed out two red marks on JonBenét’s lower back could have been made by a piece of Burke’s toy train track.
The new probe suggested Burke may have poked his sister with the track when he realised she wasn’t moving.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/1851552/friend-of-jonbenet-family-backs-theory-brother-killed-her-and-parents-covered-it-up/
Angelo222:
Having watched the most recent videos in this case the similarities with the McCann case is striking. Are people really so daft as to believe an intruder entered the family home, assaulted the child and sat down and wrote a 2½ page ransom note? Something else which is plain silly is that it took 8 hours to discover the child's body in the basement. Surely a proper search would have been carried out in the property almost immediately.
The parents refusal to assist police fully is very telling imo.
mercury:
I think you would have to a moron at best to not know this was a total cover up for the brother killing his sister
david1819:
--- Quote from: mercury on September 30, 2016, 01:16:58 AM ---I think you would have to a moron at best to not know this was a total cover up for the brother killing his sister
--- End quote ---
Really?
1. Duct tape around her mouth cannot be linked to the Ramsay's
"The black duct tape used on JonBenet's mouth has also not been sourced to defendants. (SMF P 170; PSMF P 170.) Both ends of the duct tape found on her were torn, indicating that it came from a roll of tape that had been used before. (SMF P 171; PSMF P 171.) No similar duct tape was found in the house, nor is there evidence that defendants ever used or owned such duct tape. (SMF P 172; PSMF P 172.)" (Carnes 2003:18).
Cord. "sources for the....cord used in the crime were never located, nor sourced, to defendants' home." (Carnes 2003:10).
2. The cord used around her neck cannot be linked the Ramseys
"sources for the....cord used in the crime were never located, nor sourced, to defendants' home." (Carnes 2003:10).
3. A bag containing rope and a baseball bat not belonging to the Ramsays was found in the house
A baseball bat not owned by the Ramseys found on the north side of the house has fibers consistent with fibers found in the carpet in the basement where JonBenet's body was found. (SMF P 185; PSMF P 185.)" (Carnes 2003:20).
Rope and Bag in JAR Bedroom. "a rope was found inside a brown paper sack in the guest bedroom on the second floor; defendants have indicated that neither of these items belonged to them. (SMF P 181; PSMF P 181.) Regardless of its ownership, there is no explanation why a bag containing a rope would be in the guest bedroom. Further, small pieces of the material on this brown sack were found in the "vacuuming" of JonBenet's bed and in the body bag that was used to transport her body (SMF P 181; PSMF P 181), thereby suggesting that either the bag had been near JonBenet or that someone who had touched the bag had also touched JonBenet." (Carnes 2003:93-94).
4. Debris of dirt and leaves from outside was found on the basement floor
Moreover, leaves and debris, consistent with the leaves and debris found in the window well, were found on the floor under the broken window suggesting that someone had actually entered the basement through this window. (SMF P 136; PSMF P 136.)" (Carnes 2003:88).
5. Handwriting on the ransom note does not belong to any of the parents.
During the investigation, the Boulder Police Department and Boulder County District Attorney's Office consulted at least six handwriting experts. (SMF P 191; PSMF P 191.) All of these experts consulted the original Ransom Note and original handwriting exemplars from Mrs. Ramsey. (SMF P 205; PSMF P 205.) Four of these experts were hired by the police and two were hired by defendants. (SMF P 191; PSMF P 191.) None of the six consulted experts identified Mrs. Ramsey as the author of the Ransom Note. (SMF P 195; PSMF P 195.)
All six experts cited in the Carnes opinion "agreed that Mr. Ramsey could be eliminated as the author of the Ransom Note. (SMF P 194; PSMF P 194.)" (Carnes 2003:26).
6. Unidentified male DNA found under JonBenet's fingernails
The coroner took nail clippings from JonBenet. Male DNA was found under JonBenet's right hand fingernail that does not match that of any Ramsey. (SMF P 174; PSMF P 174.) Defendants also assert that male DNA was found under JonBenet's left hand fingernail, which also does not match that of any Ramsey. (SMF P 173.)" (Carnes 2003:22).
7. Unidentified male DNA found on JonBenet's underwear
"In addition, male DNA was found in JonBenet's underwear that does not match that of any Ramsey and has not yet been sourced. (SMF PP 175, 178; PSMF PP 175, 178.)" (Carnes 2003:22).
8. The unidentified DNA under JonBenets nails can match to the DNA found in her underwear
The same AP report stated noted "its genetic markers may match evidence taken from fingernails on both of JonBenet's hands. 'There are common markers as to all three that would strongly suggest they are from the same source
And i thought the Bamber guilters were bad @)(++(*
BTW the latest CBS documentary was appalling. I could not watch it all.
mercury:
Seems most of your objections mean nothing at all in reality
Try harder
There was no third party involved and no evidence of it
It was an inside job end of
Motive means and opportunity
The behaviour of the family afterwards kinda confirmed it anyway and the son was obviously sick
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version